It seems to me that if that's the cost of getting real health care reform, it's a cost we can easily afford. There are other ways to pay for abortions. The fact that you all seem to overlook is that even a non-tax insurance policy has to get the money from somewhere to pay for abortion coverage.

And I do get tired of being anti-woman, anti-poor or even-anti abortion when I say this. The left -- of which I am often accused of being a member -- is doing itself no good with its hysterical response to this.

DALE COBERLY Corvallis

With the passage of the Stupak amendment, the United States House of Representatives has essentially classified being born a woman as a "pre-existing condition."

The Senate will be discussing how it can "Stupakify" its version of health care reform. If women do not have the right to a full range of sexual and reproductive health care services, then sexual and reproductive services should be denied to men as well.

Men should be denied prostate and testicular care, vasectomies, Viagra and penile implants. If they are unable to urinate because of an enlarged prostate, it's too bad because insurance shouldn't cover that.

If the House of Representatives has the right to deny coverage of legal health care procedures for women, then they must do the right thing and deny sexual and reproductive health care services to men as well.

MARTHA WATSON Northeast Portland

It looks like the Republicans have succeeded in banning abortion from most health care policies. I am opposed to abortion. However, I think that abortion should remain accessible. If you really want to reduce, or eliminate, abortions you need to reduce, or eliminate, the need for abortions.

That is done through education and access to birth control. As former president Bill Clinton said, abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

ROBERT AYRES Hillsboro

The House's recent decision to pass the Stupak amendment and keep abortion out of health care reform should be applauded. This common sense legislation prevents public funding of abortions by keeping abortion coverage out of the new insurance marketplace.

Contrary to some opponents' claims, this amendment does not restrict abortion, nor does it prevent anyone from purchasing abortion coverage with their own funds. Rather, it simply prevents tax dollars from funding a procedure many Americans are morally opposed to. The Stupak amendment furthered the cause of health care reform, which is why it won bipartisan support.

SEAN NYGAARD Northeast Portland

Since when was abortion elevated to "woman's civil rights," as stated in your editorial's subtitle?

Roe v. Wade was a case law decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, to permit legal abortion, but it did not make it a civil right or mandate that the American taxpayer had to foot the bill for such procedures.

ALAN L. BAKER Lake Oswego

I am pleased to see congressional progress on the health care reform bill. It really bothers me that some people don't recognize the need for health care access as a basic human right.

I would sooner write a blank check to insure the health of all Americans, than spend the money to make war and rebuild distant countries. The inequity and insecurity we face as individuals in dealing with health care and health insurance issues has cost our nation a lot.

The abortion payment restriction is a moral attack against women and choice. I hope it will be stripped from the bill before it is finally put into law. Singling out this one particular procedure is not something that should derail the progress of the bill.

Those who are driven by their zealous beliefs to legislate against an individual's medical needs are despicable. I urge Congress, the president and our courts to keep abortion safe and legal, as well as making it an insured medical procedure.